DOCSLIB.ORG

INTRODUCTION This Catalog Presents the Archived Documentation Files for the Datasets Currently in the Konza Prairie LTER Site Database

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

INTRODUCTION This catalog presents the archived documentation files for the datasets currently in the Konza Prairie LTER site database. These datasets are affiliated with LTER scientists associated with the Konza Prairie LTER research program from 1981 to 1992. The purpose of this catalog is to assist scientists in the analysis and synthesis of this database. In addition to this catalog, a detailed methods manual documents the procedures used in collecting these data sets. The design of the current Konza Prairie LTER database is straightforward. All data sets are in ASCII format (with exception of GIS coverages; See GIS01). The entire database is available at: http://www.konza.ksu.edu. The database is divided into subgroups. The subgroups correspond to the research groups that have developed on Konza or represents the data set. They are: Abiotic, Belowground, Consumer, Nutrient, Organic, Other, and Woody. The first letter of the data set code indicates which subgroup the file is in. The extension of the file name represents the year of the data set. For example the data set associated with prairie precipitation for 1986 (data set code APT01), is found in the subgroup abiotic under the file name of apt011.86. Data sets that do not conform to this naming procedure are listed in the abstract section of their corresponding data set code description. For the most part, these data sets involve data that comes from other sources than LTER investigators (e.g. USGS flow data or NADP). The subgroup woody contains the files of the dataset code PWV01.The subgroup Other is reserved for datasets that do not conform to the naming procedures (for now, datasets from the water supplementation experiment (WAT01) are here). To have consistent format of LTER data files, most LTER data sets have the first 16 columns of each line organized as: Variable Name Columns Format Units 1. Datacode 1-5 A5 2. Rectype 6 I1 3. Year 7-8 I2 4. Month 9-10 I2 5. Day 11-12 I2 6. Watershed 13-16 A4 Thus, each line has the data set code associated with it. Although, this was setup in the “days of computer cards” and it was important to have the data set code on each card, it is now useful to have this information in case of hardware failures (disk crashes, bad tapes, etc.) All quality control checks are managed by the principal investigator(s) associated with a data set. System backups are executed on a nightly basis on DAT 24 tape cartridges and twice a year on compact disks. Data requests for data not available online simply require the following information: 1) Formal written request and a statement of intended use. 2) Approval of the investigator and/or the Konza Prairie LTER Principal Investigator. 3) Request must be filed with the Konza Prairie LTER information manager. 4) Release of data (following approval) should include a cover letter specifying that: The data are released for your use only and for the purposes outlined in your request. 5) Manuscripts using the data are to be provided to the Principal Investigator, LTER, Division of Biology, Ackert Hall, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506 so that he/she may notify the appropriate investigators. 6) Publication of these data are allowed by the expressed permission of Konza Prairie LTER investigators named, who have primary responsibility for the data sets. 1 7) Acknowledgment should be made to recognize the contribution of data by Konza Prairie LTER. In addition, the format shown below is also to be included with the letter. Citation of a data set should use the following format: "Data from the Konza Prairie Research Natural Area were collected as part of the Konza Prairie LTER program (NSF grants DEB-8012166 and BSR- 8514327, BSR-9011662), Division of Biology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS. Data and supporting documentation are stored (Data Set Code(s)=_____) in the Konza Prairie Research Natural Area LTER Data Bank." Additionally, specific investigators might be cited for their contributions to the paper. SITE DESCRIPTION CLIMATE SYNOPSIS: Temperate mid-continental climate. Yearly mean temperature is 13C with a range of extremes from 6 to 19C. The January mean temperature is -3²C (range -9 to 3C) and the July mean is 27C (range 20 to 33C). Annual precipitation is 835 mm of which about 75% occurs in the growing season. Mean snowfall for January is 150 mm with an annual total of 521 mm. Mean annual windspeed is 5 meters per second from the south. NARRATIVE: Tallgrass or bluestem prairie is one of the major ecosystem types of the conterminous United States (exceeded in area only by eastern deciduous forest). Undisturbed examples of tallgrass prairie are rare because this ecosystem type has been extensively converted to agroecosystems. Konza Prairie is representative of the Flints Hills, a dissected upland with hard chert- and flint- bearing limestone layers. The ridges are usually flat with shallow, rocky soils, whereas the larger and wider valleys have deep permeable soils. The steep-sided hills are characterized by exposed Permian limestone and shale strata that prevented cultivation. When acquired in the 1970's, the majority of Konza Prairie was dominated by native prairie species, especially big bluestem, indian grass, little bluestem, and switchgrass. Lowland areas with deep soils now have patches of these and other tallgrasses that grow to 2 to 3 m by late summer. Gallery forests on lower Kings Creek are dominated by bur and chinquapin oaks with green ash, hackberry, elm, and black walnut often common. The KSU herbarium contains more than 450 species of vascular plants collected from Konza Prairie. Woody plants have been mapped according to species and size on some portions of the site. Species lists have also been developed for a number of animal groups including birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and aquatic invertebrates. Konza Prairie is managed to provide an array of burning and grazing (especially bison) treatments to facilitate research to evaluate the effects of fire and grazing on plant composition, primary production, consumer density and diversity, nutrient dynamics, soil chemistry, and hydrology (Fig. 1). This natural prairie also serves as a reference site from comparison to manipulated agricultural systems. Fire, started by both lightning and aboriginal man, influenced patterns and processes in the tallgrass prairie. To understand these effects, a series of spring burning treatments (primarily areas burned at 1,2,4,10, and 20 year intervals) are maintained on watershed units. These experimental burns are conducted in April before the dominant warm-season grasses begin active growth. Treatment boundaries follow watershed divides to facilitate analysis of hydrologic and nutrient responses to fire and frequency of fire. An extensive soil water/ground water monitoring system has been installed by the USGS on one of these watersheds. Bison were introduced into a fenced area of nearly 500 ha encompassing several different burn treatments in 1987. The area affected by bison will be enlarged to 1100 ha in 1991. Bison, free-ranging within the fenced area, are able to choose between burned and unburned prairie and 2 among sites representing an array of topographic/physiographic conditions. Cattle grazing still occurs sporadically on parts of Konza Prairie but not on the primary LTER research watersheds. 3 Table of Contents Table of Contents....................................................................................................................... 4 Abiotic Data .................................................................................................................................. 6 Data Set Code--AGW01 ............................................................................................................6 Data Set Code--AGW02 ............................................................................................................8 Data Set Code--ANA01 ............................................................................................................. 9 Data Set Code--APT01 ............................................................................................................ 13 Data Set Code--APT02 ............................................................................................................ 15 Data Set Code--ASD01............................................................................................................ 16 Data Set Code--ASD02,ASD04, ASD05,ASD06.................................................................... 17 Data Set Code--ASM01 ........................................................................................................... 19 Data Set Code--ASR01............................................................................................................ 20 Data Set Code--AST01 ............................................................................................................ 22 Data Set Code--AWE01........................................................................................................... 24 Data Set Code--AWT01........................................................................................................... 26 Data Set Code--AWT02........................................................................................................... 27 Belowground Data....................................................................................................................... 28 Data Set Code--BLGPVC .......................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Invertebrate Distribution and Diversity Assessment at the U. S. Army Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site a Report to the U

    Invertebrate Distribution and Diversity Assessment at the U. S. Army Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site a Report to the U

    Invertebrate Distribution and Diversity Assessment at the U. S. Army Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site A report to the U. S. Army and U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service G. J. Michels, Jr., J. L. Newton, H. L. Lindon, and J. A. Brazille Texas AgriLife Research 2301 Experiment Station Road Bushland, TX 79012 2008 Report Introductory Notes The invertebrate survey in 2008 presented an interesting challenge. Extremely dry conditions prevailed throughout most of the adult activity period for the invertebrates and grass fires occurred several times throughout the summer. By visual assessment, plant resources were scarce compared to last year, with few green plants and almost no flowering plants. Eight habitats and nine sites continued to be sampled in 2008. The Ponderosa pine/ yellow indiangrass site was removed from the study after the low numbers of species and individuals collected there in 2007. All other sites from the 2007 survey were included in the 2008 survey. We also discontinued the collection of Coccinellidae in the 2008 survey, as only 98 individuals from four species were collected in 2007. Pitfall and malaise trapping were continued in the same way as the 2007 survey. Sweep net sampling was discontinued to allow time for Asilidae and Orthoptera timed surveys consisting of direct collection of individuals with a net. These surveys were conducted in the same way as the time constrained butterfly (Papilionidea and Hesperoidea) surveys, with 15-minute intervals for each taxanomic group. This was sucessful when individuals were present, but the dry summer made it difficult to assess the utility of these techniques because of overall low abundance of insects.
  • The Taxonomy of Utah Orthoptera

    The Taxonomy of Utah Orthoptera

    Great Basin Naturalist Volume 14 Number 3 – Number 4 Article 1 12-30-1954 The taxonomy of Utah Orthoptera Andrew H. Barnum Brigham Young University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation Barnum, Andrew H. (1954) "The taxonomy of Utah Orthoptera," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 14 : No. 3 , Article 1. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol14/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. IMUS.COMP.ZSOL iU6 1 195^ The Great Basin Naturalist harvard Published by the HWIilIijM i Department of Zoology and Entomology Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah Volum e XIV DECEMBER 30, 1954 Nos. 3 & 4 THE TAXONOMY OF UTAH ORTHOPTERA^ ANDREW H. BARNUM- Grand Junction, Colorado INTRODUCTION During the years of 1950 to 1952 a study of the taxonomy and distribution of the Utah Orthoptera was made at the Brigham Young University by the author under the direction of Dr. Vasco M. Tan- ner. This resulted in a listing of the species found in the State. Taxonomic keys were made and compiled covering these species. Distributional notes where available were made with the brief des- criptions of the species. The work was based on the material in the entomological col- lection of the Brigham Young University, with additional records obtained from the collection of the Utah State Agricultural College.
  • Effects of Livestock Grazing on Aboveground Insect Communities In

    Effects of Livestock Grazing on Aboveground Insect Communities In

    Biodiversity and Conservation (2006) 15:2547–2564 Ó Springer 2006 DOI 10.1007/s10531-005-2786-9 -1 Effects of livestock grazing on aboveground insect communities in semi-arid grasslands of southeastern Arizona SANDRA J. DEBANO Department of Entomology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky 40546-0091, USA; Present address: Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Oregon State University, Hermiston Agricultural Research and Extension Center, P.O. Box 105, Hermiston, Oregon 97838-7100, USA (e-mail: [email protected]; phone: +001-541-567-6337; fax: +001-541-567-2240) Received 22 June 2004; accepted in revised form 14 February 2005 Key words: Arizona, Grasslands, Insect communities, Insect conservation, Livestock grazing Abstract. Despite the importance of invertebrates in grassland ecosystems, few studies have examined how grassland invertebrates have been impacted by disturbances in the southwestern United States. These grasslands may be particularly sensitive to one common disturbance, livestock grazing, because they have not recently evolved in the presence of large herds of bison, an important mammalian herbivore. This study examined how livestock grazing influenced vegetation- associated insect communities in southeastern Arizona. Insect abundance, richness, diversity, community composition, and key environmental variables were compared between sites on active cattle ranches and sites on a 3160 ha sanctuary that has not been grazed by cattle for over 25 years. Vegetation-associated insect communities were found to be sensitive to livestock grazing. Overall abundance of these insects was lower on grazed grasslands, and certain insect orders appeared to be negatively affected by livestock grazing; beetles were less rich, flies were less diverse, and Hymenoptera were less rich and diverse on grazed sites.
  • The Taxonomy of Utah Orthoptera with Notes on Distribution

    The Taxonomy of Utah Orthoptera with Notes on Distribution

    Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 1952-06-01 The Taxonomy of Utah orthoptera with notes on distribution Andrew H. Barnum Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Life Sciences Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Barnum, Andrew H., "The Taxonomy of Utah orthoptera with notes on distribution" (1952). Theses and Dissertations. 7622. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/7622 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. THE TAXONOMY OF UTAH ORTHOP'J.'ERA WI'.l'H NOTES ON DISTRIBU'l'ION A Thesis submitted to the Department of Zoology and Entomology ot Brigham YOWJg U'ninraity In paJ"tial fulfillment ot the requirements tor the degree ot 1111.ater ot Arte by Andrew H. Barnum June 1962 This thesia by Andrew H. Barnwa is accepted 1n its present t'Ol"Dl by the Special Theaia Comnd:ttee a.a aatisfying the thed1 requirements tor ine degree ot ltaater or Arte. Signed 11 A theaia represents the combined efforts ot ma111inrliT1duala and groupa, many ot whom ha'Ye nner seen the completed product wt haYe rendered aasietanoe in some way to make its OOJn.pletionpo•sible. .Appreciation ia therefore extended to theee individuals for the assistance rendered. Appreciation is especially extended to Dr. Vasoo u. Tanner., head of: the Department of zoology and i,"lltomology of the Brigham Young University, under whose guidanoe and personal work a oolleotion of O:rthoptera was built up and which has been turned into the moat outstanding collection ill the state of Utah.
  • Preliminary Checklist of the Orthopteroid Insects (Blattodea, Mantodea, Phasmatodea,Orthoptera) of Texas

    Preliminary Checklist of the Orthopteroid Insects (Blattodea, Mantodea, Phasmatodea,Orthoptera) of Texas

    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Center for Systematic Entomology, Gainesville, Insecta Mundi Florida March 2001 Preliminary checklist of the orthopteroid insects (Blattodea, Mantodea, Phasmatodea,Orthoptera) of Texas John A. Stidham Garland, TX Thomas A. Stidham University of California, Berkeley, CA Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/insectamundi Part of the Entomology Commons Stidham, John A. and Stidham, Thomas A., "Preliminary checklist of the orthopteroid insects (Blattodea, Mantodea, Phasmatodea,Orthoptera) of Texas" (2001). Insecta Mundi. 180. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/insectamundi/180 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for Systematic Entomology, Gainesville, Florida at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Insecta Mundi by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. INSECTA MUNDI, Vol. 15, No. 1, March, 2001 35 Preliminary checklist of the orthopteroid insects (Blattodea, Mantodea, Phasmatodea,Orthoptera) of Texas John A. Stidham 301 Pebble Creek Dr., Garland, TX 75040 and Thomas A. Stidham Department of Integrative Biology, Museum of Paleontology, and Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, Abstract: Texas has one of the most diverse orthopteroid assemblages of any state in the United States, reflecting the varied habitats found in the state. Three hundred and eighty-nine species and 78 subspecies of orthopteroid insects (Blattodea, Mantodea, Phasmatodea, and Orthoptera) have published records for the state of Texas. This is the first such comprehensive checklist for Texas and should aid future work on these groups in this area. Introduction (Flook and Rowell, 1997).
  • 100 Characters

    100 Characters

    40 Review and Update of Non-mollusk Invertebrate Species in Greatest Need of Conservation: Final Report Leon C. Hinz Jr. and James N. Zahniser Illinois Natural History Survey Prairie Research Institute University of Illinois 30 April 2015 INHS Technical Report 2015 (31) Prepared for: Illinois Department of Natural Resources State Wildlife Grant Program (Project Number T-88-R-001) Unrestricted: for immediate online release. Prairie Research Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign Brian D. Anderson, Interim Executive Director Illinois Natural History Survey Geoffrey A. Levin, Acting Director 1816 South Oak Street Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-6830 Final Report Project Title: Review and Update of Non-mollusk Invertebrate Species in Greatest Need of Conservation. Project Number: T-88-R-001 Contractor information: University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign Institute of Natural Resource Sustainability Illinois Natural History Survey 1816 South Oak Street Champaign, IL 61820 Project Period: 1 October 2013—31 September 2014 Principle Investigator: Leon C. Hinz Jr., Ph.D. Stream Ecologist Illinois Natural History Survey One Natural Resources Way, Springfield, IL 62702-1271 217-785-8297 [email protected] Prepared by: Leon C. Hinz Jr. & James N. Zahniser Goals/ Objectives: (1) Review all SGNC listing criteria for currently listed non-mollusk invertebrate species using criteria in Illinois Wildlife Action Plan, (2) Assess current status of species populations, (3) Review criteria for additional species for potential listing as SGNC, (4) Assess stressors to species previously reviewed, (5) Complete draft updates and revisions of IWAP Appendix I and Appendix II for non-mollusk invertebrates. T-88 Final Report Project Title: Review and Update of Non-mollusk Invertebrate Species in Greatest Need of Conservation.
  • Arizona Wildlife Notebook

    Arizona Wildlife Notebook

    ARIZONA WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ARIZONA WILDLIFE NOTEBOOK GARRY ROGERS Praise for Arizona Wildlife Notebook “Arizona Wildlife Notebook” by Garry Rogers is a comprehensive checklist of wildlife species existing in the State of Arizona. This notebook provides a brief description for each of eleven (11) groups of wildlife, conservation status of all extant species within that group in Arizona, alphabetical listing of species by common name, scientific names, and room for notes. “The Notebook is a statewide checklist, intended for use by wildlife watchers all over the state. As various individuals keep track of their personal observations of wildlife in their specific locality, the result will be a more selective checklist specific to that locale. Such information would be vitally useful to the State Wildlife Conservation Department, as well as to other local agencies and private wildlife watching groups. “This is a very well-documented snapshot of the status of wildlife species – from bugs to bats – in the State of Arizona. Much of it should be relevant to neighboring states, as well, with a bit of fine-tuning to accommodate additions and deletions to the list. “As a retired Wildlife Biologist, I have to say Rogers’ book is perhaps the simplest to understand, yet most comprehensive in terms of factual information, that I have ever had occasion to peruse. This book should become the default checklist for Arizona’s various state, federal and local conservation agencies, and the basis for developing accurate local inventories by private enthusiasts as well as public agencies. "Arizona Wildlife Notebook" provides a superb starting point for neighboring states who may wish to emulate Garry Rogers’ excellent handiwork.
  • Orthoptera: Acrididae)

    Orthoptera: Acrididae)

    204 Florida Entomologist 88(2) June 2005 MANDIBULAR MORPHOLOGY OF SOME FLORIDIAN GRASSHOPPERS (ORTHOPTERA: ACRIDIDAE) TREVOR RANDALL SMITH AND JOHN L. CAPINERA University of Florida, Department of Entomology and Nematology, Gainesville, FL 32611 The relationship between mouthpart structure zen until examination. Mandibles were removed and diet has been known for years. This connec- from thawed specimens by lifting the labrum and tion between mouthpart morphology and specific pulling out each mandible separately with for- food types is incredibly pronounced in the class In- ceps. Only young adults were used in an effort to secta (Snodgrass 1935). As insects have evolved avoid confusion of mandible type due to mandible and adapted to new food sources, their mouthparts erosion (Chapman 1964; Uvarov 1977). An exam- have changed accordingly. This is an extremely im- ple of moderate erosion can be seen in Figure 1 (I). portant trait for evolutionary biologists (Brues This process was replicated with 10 individuals 1939) as well as systematists (Mulkern 1967). from each species. After air-drying, each mandi- Isley (1944) was one of the first to study grass- ble was glued to the head of a #3 or #2 insect pin, hopper mouthparts in detail. He described three depending on its size, for easier manipulation, groups of mandibles according to general struc- and examined microscopically. ture and characteristic diet. These three groups, We used Isley’s (1944) description of mandible still used today, were graminivorous (grass-feed- types and their adaptive functions to divide the ing type) with grinding molars and incisors typi- mandibles into 3 major categories: forbivorous cally fused into a scythe-like cutting edge, for- (forb-feeding), graminivorous (grass-feeding), bivorous (forb or broadleaf plant-feeding type) and herbivorous (mixed-feeding).
  • Field Guide to Some of the Common Grasshoppers of the Front Range of Colorado

    Field Guide to Some of the Common Grasshoppers of the Front Range of Colorado

    Field guide to some of the common grasshoppers of the Front Range of Colorado Instructions: The following guide presents the grasshopper species most commonly found along an elevational gradient from the plains of Boulder, Colorado, to the subalpine that lies to the west. Use this guide to identify the species that are found during each weekly sample at your designated site. This will help you determine whether climate change is impacting the timing to adulthood of each community. Grasshoppers of the Front Range There are 548 species of North American grasshoppers and 133 of these occur in Colorado. Only about a dozen of these species are considered important pests on rangelands, with five of these causing most problems on crops. Within the Front Range of Colorado, 72 species can be found, although most are relatively uncommon. The most commonly encountered species along our lower foothills (1752m) to subalpine (3000 m) transect can be placed into 3 groups (subfamilies); Gomphocerinae, Melanoplinae and Oedipodinae. The Gomphocerinae (slant-faced grasshoppers) are grass specialists that tend to be small and are the grasshoppers commonly heard in meadows chorusing during the day. The Melanoplinae (spur-throated grasshoppers) are the most commonly encountered grasshoppers and are primarily forb feeders. Melanoplinae are small (but some can be large) and several of these species tend to be short winged and cannot actively fly, They do not chorus. Most of the Oedipodinae (banded-winged grasshoppers) tend to be grass feeders or herbivorous (both grass and forb feeding) and are rarely solely forb feeders. These grasshoppers are commonly found in open areas where they bask and display, they vary considerably in size, and are all active fliers that often use their wings to make loud clicking sounds.
  • INSECT DIVERSITY and PEST STATUS on SWITCHGRASS GROWN for BIOFUEL in SOUTH CAROLINA Claudia Holguin Clemson University, Cholgui@Clemson.Edu

    INSECT DIVERSITY and PEST STATUS on SWITCHGRASS GROWN for BIOFUEL in SOUTH CAROLINA Claudia Holguin Clemson University, [email protected]

    Clemson University TigerPrints All Theses Theses 8-2010 INSECT DIVERSITY AND PEST STATUS ON SWITCHGRASS GROWN FOR BIOFUEL IN SOUTH CAROLINA Claudia Holguin Clemson University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation Holguin, Claudia, "INSECT DIVERSITY AND PEST STATUS ON SWITCHGRASS GROWN FOR BIOFUEL IN SOUTH CAROLINA" (2010). All Theses. 960. https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses/960 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses by an authorized administrator of TigerPrints. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INSECT DIVERSITY AND PEST STATUS ON SWITCHGRASS GROWN FOR BIOFUEL IN SOUTH CAROLINA A Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of Clemson University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science Entomology by Claudia Maria Holguin August 2010 Accepted by: Dr. Francis Reay-Jones, Committee Chair Dr. Peter Adler Dr. Juang-Horng 'JC' Chong Dr. Jim Frederick ABSTRACT Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) has tremendous potential as a biomass and stock crop for cellulosic ethanol production or combustion as a solid fuel. The first goal of this study was to assess diversity of insects in a perennial switchgrass crop in South Carolina. A three-year study was conducted to sample insects using pitfall traps and sweep nets at the Pee Dee Research and Education Center in Florence, SC, from 2007- 2009. Collected specimens were identified to family and classified by trophic groups, and predominant species were identified.
  • Orthoptera: Acrididae: Gomphocerinae) and Notes on Wing Polymorphism and Geographic Distribution

    Orthoptera: Acrididae: Gomphocerinae) and Notes on Wing Polymorphism and Geographic Distribution

    Zootaxa 4838 (4): 515–524 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) https://www.mapress.com/j/zt/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2020 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4838.4.5 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:D79B4CEF-7E88-4941-8682-1FCE0C85EE3B A new discovery of a long-winged form of Mexican endemic grasshopper Melanotettix dibelonius Bruner, 1904 (Orthoptera: Acrididae: Gomphocerinae) and notes on wing polymorphism and geographic distribution RICARDO MARIÑO-PÉREZ1, SALOMÓN SANABRIA-URBÁN2*, BERT FOQUET3, MARTINA E. POCCO4 & HOJUN SONG3 1Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan, 3600 Varsity Drive, 48108 Ann Arbor, MI, USA. �[email protected]; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0566-1372 2Laboratory of Ecology, UBIPRO, Facultad de Estudios Superiores Iztacala, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Av. de los Barrios #1, Tlalnepantla, México 54090, México. �[email protected]; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4079-498X 3Department of Entomology, Texas A&M University, 2475 TAMU, 77843-2475 College Station, TX, USA. �[email protected]; https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1643-6522 �[email protected]; https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6115-0473 4Centro de Estudios Parasitológicos y de Vectores (CEPAVE), CONICET-UNLP, Boulevard 120 s/n entre av. 60 y calle 64, (1900), La Plata, Argentina and División Entomología, Museo de La Plata, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, (1900) La Plata, Argentina. �[email protected]; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3966-4053 *Corresponding author. Abstract The species Melanotettix dibelonius Bruner, 1904 was previously recorded from Michoacán and Guerrero states in Mexico. This species is characterized by its tegmina, which are always shorter than head and pronotum together and sometimes shorter than the pronotum.
  • Kopulation Und Sexualethologie Von Rotflügeliger/Blauflügeliger

    Kopulation Und Sexualethologie Von Rotflügeliger/Blauflügeliger

    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Galathea, Berichte des Kreises Nürnberger Entomologen e.V. Jahr/Year: 2019 Band/Volume: 35 Autor(en)/Author(s): Mader Detlef Artikel/Article: Kopulation und Sexualethologie von Rotflügeliger/Blauflügeliger Ödlandschrecke, anderen Heuschrecken, Gottesanbeterin, anderen Fangschrecken, Mosaikjungfer, Prachtlibelle und anderen Libellen 121-201 gal athea Band 35 • Beiträge des Kreises Nürnberger Entomologen • 2019 • S. 121-201 Kopulation und Sexualethologie von Rotflügeliger/Blauflügeliger Ödlandschrecke, anderen Heuschrecken, Gottesanbeterin, anderen Fangschrecken, Mosaikjungfer, Prachtlibelle und anderen Libellen DETLEF MADER Inhaltsverzeichnis Seite Zusammenfassung ................................................................................................................................................. 124 Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................................ 124 Key Words .................................................................................................................................................................. 125 1 Kopulation und Sexualethologie von Insekten ................................................................ 125 1.1 Die wichtigsten Stellungen bei der Kopulation von Insekten ................................. 127 1.1.1 Antipodale